Najib and his Imam of Mecca



In Salafist/Wahhabist Saudi Arabia, they first introduced Shia Muslims into the To-Kill List then added Jews and Christians. Who’s to do the killing on Saudi behalf? The ISIS (Daesh) and, before them, al-Qaeda. That’s half the world to kill. What about the other half?

In Malaysia, the Wahhabists at Najib Razak’s office and the motherfucker mufti of Pahang added the Chinese — the kafir harbi — to the To-Kill List and, to prove their point, had earlier brought out Ismail Sabri, Harussani Zakaria, Jamal Yunos, Tinju Ali and the Red Shirts. Then China’s Ambassador to Malaysia stepped in, telling Najib on clear terms: “We [China] will not sit by idly.

Najib’s balls froze, and they hadn’t recovered since.


In the commentator’s clip above is the opening segment showing the Wahhabi imam of the Mecca Grand Mosque praying. What does he pray for? The clip has English subtitles.

Imagine, thus, what Jakim officials and those muftis pray for on Fridays? Promising the Califake? And they’d expect us, the Chinese, to believe that hudud has nothing to do with ‘non-Muslims’. Even Malays like Siti Kassim (below) don’t trust them. Why should the Chinese?

Hudud is Chinese business and, we, the Chinese are going to make it our business to interfere. So what, Jamil Khir? Go fuck your mother, Jamil.

The Chinese stand with true Malays, not the Califake.


From https://i0.wp.com/media.themalaymailonline.com/uploads/authors/mmocol-zurairiar-200x200.png

Felicitations from Malaysia: 恭喜 恭喜 Congratulations!


Hong Kong’s unicameral mini-parliament the Legislative Council (LegCo) is composed of 70 seats, half delineated by geography (hence Geographical Constituencies, GC) and the other half by economic and social function (Functional Constituencies, FC).

This month’s election is the sixth since Hong Kong was returned to China in 1997. For a population of seven million, and 3.37 million registered voters, Hong Kong people are spoiled for choices, about 2 dozen political parties. Only vaguely is the division of these parties on a left-right spectrum. Instead, and much like in Taiwan, the parties are grouped into two rival camps: those wanting closer ties with Beijing (the pro-Beijing) and those wanting greater autonomy (the pan-Democrats).

Pro-Beijing have always been, even today, strongest in functional constituencies and have half the seats by geography. In combination, therefore, they have the equivalent of a two-thirds majority to change the HK constitution known as the Basic Law though this hasn’t happened so far.

In this election, the outcome proved to be different. Pan-Democrats won three extra GC seats in the election that ended yesterday, giving them 19 out of 35. Added to the eight retained at FC, their combined total of 27 is more than the 24 seats (of 70 overall) needed to deny pro-Beijing a two-thirds majority. This margin is necessary because the pan-Democrats are so splintered.

There were other new things in this election. At 58 percent or about 2.2 million votes, voter turnout is the highest of the last three elections. Numerous first time candidates, nearly all young, under age 30, are fiercely for autonomy and six of them have won seats by huge margins, as much as 70,000 votes. Among them are:

  • Nathan Law 羅冠聰, age 23, from a new party named, in English, Demosisto. He is now the youngest legislator.


  • Leung Chung-hang 梁頌恆, 30, like Law, also ex-Umbrella Movement, party Youngspiration.


  • Yau Wai-ching 游蕙禎, 25, graduate in Chinese language, also Youngspiration. She won on a 424-vote margin.


Campaigning below for Wai-ching: Notice that, unlike ceramahs in Malaysia, candidates like Yau speak alone at a street corner, sometimes facing no one — not one human being. It is a lonely job, but this campaign method is cheap: a bullhorn and posters, maybe fliers, and that’s all. No free curry puffs, no chairs, no stage, nothing else.


  • Other pan Democrats: the seasoned politicians.


Below, the pro-Beijing camp.



Umno Made the Chinese Rich

…and the Malaiyoos poor

Now, one graph flips everything around!


Statistics & Rahman Dahlan Myth-Making

One bar — Perak — in the graph above, produced by Khazanah and drawn from the statistics by the Department of Statistics (DoS), so shocked and surprised Rahman Dahlan, a Najib Razak minister in charge of the Economics Planning Unit, that he promptly called into question the chart’s veracity. Consequently, he has threatened to summon Khazanah and the Perak government to sit before him to explain.

Why pick on Perak? Why is Rahman refuting Khazanah on statistics supplied by the DoS after all, then adding that the graph was both ‘unreasonable’ and ‘illogical’?

The answer has to come from Umno and from Rahman himself, he being a Sabah Malaiyoo.

For 40, 50, 60 years, it has been the Umno political trope and bell-ringer that Umno made Malaysia, Malays in particular. Concomitantly, if the Chinese got rich, and they made the Forbes’ Top 20 Richest Malaysian every year, then their wealth came from and was permitted by Umno. (One reads this reproduced endlessly in Kadir Jasin, Apanama, Petra Kamarudin, Ahirudin Attan, Helen Ang, other Najib sycophants, and countless others.)

That sort of myth-making has a throwback, a boomerang effect: If the Umno made Chinese rich, so they must have made the Malay poor. The like of Ahi and Helen Ang can’t see the argument’s flip side of course. (They are just reporters.) Nor will RPK’s still-growing up daughter Sara Petra see it as an Umno betrayal of the Malays. In the Petra household, stupidity is inherited.

Not Rahman, it seems.

Each year, as the statistical results roll in, Umno, willingly and happily, will let everyone see Kelantan, Perlis, Kedah, Pahang bunched together among the poorest lot. Suddenly and out of the blue comes Perak, almost half Chinese, and it gets next to Kelantan among the poorest — shockingly, 15 percentage points above the national mean (‘average’ is the street word).

Pause a moment here and imagine the implications, especially in this respect: According to Umno et al, the Chinese are always rich, they are a money-grubbing lot, stealing from the Malays.

The graph related to Perak flies in the face of this Umno myth-making. What could be Rahman’s response, therefore? That stupid motherfucker Malaiyoo has taken in as the truth and so deeply internalized the Umno myth that anything else, even if statistically accurate, is either ‘illogical’ and ‘unreasonable’.

Question: What is illogical about Perak? What is it to be unreasonable? To Rahman, and to almost all Malaiyoo bloggers, being reasonable and being logical have their own definitions. Truth, including any objective fact, is only for them to define, even if it is a tree or a stone.

Perak’s statistical presence next to Kelantan simply doesn’t fit their definition. It is like a square peg in the round shit hole of Umno’s myth that all Chinese are rich. In another phrasing, Rahman’s remark was being political, not statistical. Therefore, he doesn’t find it odd that Perlis is up there among the poorest so he blames instead not the statistical veracity but calls in Khazanah and the Perak government: What are you fuckers doing? You are suppose to make Malays look poor. Not the Chinese!

If Rahman were to blame the DoS, then it calls into question not just the entire graph, but every piece of statistics coming from the department. This might just mean that Malays are now, on average, actually richer than the Chinese. Imagine, again, what this does to Umno’s raison d’etre. (Rahman, of course, is just another of those third-rate minds who filled Umno and national leadership and almost all were schooled by Mara, by Umno, by New Straits Times, by Utusan especially during Mahathir’s era so that is it any wonder none of them regard 1MDB as theft but rather as ‘political funding’.)

Next thing to tackle: Is the household as a means of charting poverty or wealth flawed at all? Short answer: it is. Absolutely. Textbook macroeconomics never, never, never, never, never uses households to determine or to fix relative incomes. Why?

We won’t supply the answer. But here’s a hint: on your next trip to Kelantan or Kedah, look into and at the characteristics of a typical Malay household then compare that to any Chinese household whether in Perak or Bangsar. More hints: compare household — and family — sizes, number of children in each, and number of income-earning adults (has to be income-earning and not a 22-year-old Sara Petra loafer or a Riza Aziz Mat Rempit thief)? And also, what makes for a family and what makes a household? Is there a difference between a Malay household and a Chinese household? How many families live in a Chinese household versus a Malay?

After which, answer the question: what do those characteristics mean to and how do they translate into income? How is income per household affected by household demographics and by family demographics? (Malaiyoo bloggers, don’t bother with this test. Thinking, even at the most elementary, is too hard for you. Go eat your KFC chicken; it’s all prepared and ready.)

Those answers lead to another question: if household is a fraudulent measure of relative incomes, why do the DoS and the Government keep using it and the newspapers and Umno and Khazanah keep regurgitating it? If, at this stage, you must ask that then… this entire post has been a waste of time. Our time.


Update. For the record…

Thank you, Old Horse


What to do with Umno-1MDB

I am afraid of no one, I only fear Allah. …I started in Pekan and my political career will end in Pekan. — Najib Razak in Umno Pekan, 2016, Sep 3



The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly. — Thus Spoke Zarathustra

The feelings of devotion, self-sacrifice for one’s neighbor, the whole morality of self-denial must be questioned mercilessly and taken to court…. There is too much charm and sugar in these feelings of ‘for others,’ ‘not for myself,’ for us not to need to become doubly suspicious at this point and to ask: ‘are these not perhaps seductions? — Friedrich Nietzsche


A Place for Umno’s 36 1MDB Skulls

At Sarawak Report, Clare Brown has solved (here) one of the greatest Malaysian political puzzles of our time: What to do with the skulls of Umno after they are are dead?

Answer: Hang them on the porch of a longhouse named 1MDB. It will be Najib along with everyone else in the 36-member Umno fascist supreme council. In separate rooms will be Najib’s macai-macai, the running dogs, launderers, prepaid bloggers, 1MDB police, investigators and lawyers, 1MDB directors (you, too, Arul!), the Arabian Mohamad brothers, the towel heads of Umno and PAS, Jakim officers, and those local and foreign bankers, from AmBank and Goldman Sachs in particular.

If Adenan refuses to cooperate, we’ll build the longhouse in Putrajaya, facing the Prime Minister’s office. In time, Longhouse 1MDB shall be renamed Longhouse Umno-1MDB and turned into a museum to remind this country: What we do with the scourge of Malaysia.

Below is a suggested picture design of Longhouse Umno-1MDB. The flag is mandatory, by order of the Putrajaya/Bersatu municipal council.


Along the porch; modern version


Or, would you prefer this design…


Or this.


Suggested contraptions to hold the skulls




The curator of this Umno skull museum shall be someone ‘neutral’, neither pro-Tun nor pro-Najib — that is, someone who has trouble distinguishing between what’s criminal and what’s legal, what’s right and wrong; someone who can’t tell the difference between theft and legitimate, self-earned; someone stupid and naive, someone like …. A?

And there’s Helen Ang. So keen is she to preserve Umno’s Heads, Helen can be the deputy curator, seated 12 hours daily at the entrance, collecting door fees, checking tickets. Old Petra Kamarudin, since he owns a dagger he took to ceramahs, is hereby named the museum sentry-guard; it’s all he can do today, that fart of an illiterate, over-rated half-Malaiyoo: ‘You look up when you wish to be exalted. And I look down because I am exalted.‘ (Nietzsche)

Of course, all are welcomed to tour the museum and see the Umno porch-skulls. Prizes for identifying who’s who: Minimum three correct answers out of 36 gets a Proton Wira with any of the number plates, 36MO1 through to 36MO36, all signed in person by Mahathir Mohamad.



Other people are dead.

It isn’t because of 1MDB, which brings its own reasons, already well documented, for destroying Umno.

No; it is this instead: Umno’s Malaiyoo politics constructs and maintains not just a nest of thieves (in the pretense of some half-baked woman Malaiyoo, the nest is called ‘KFC-dinner-with-Umno-bigshot’), and they, like Najib, steal with impunity, but because the party turns other people non-existent. When, in Malaiyoo politics, no other peoples exist (the pendatangs) then Umno denounces an entire humanity and refutes an entire country and all that constitutes and makes for its distinctiveness.

Merdeka? It’s just another Umno event. Not true? But, who do you see most on Facebook or are most talked about?

Today, September 3, 2016, Sybil Kathigasu was born 117 years ago (Google below). She might as well not exist since in Umno and its school history books she is neither Malaiyoo nor Muslim. Who has read of her?




Merdeka? Kiss My Umno Ass

A year ago when Mahathir Mohamad began campaigning against Najib Razak, his presumption then, he said in Kelantan recently, was that Umno could be salvaged after its Head was cut off from its body — it’s the Malaysian Anglophile Theory of the Rotten Fish Head. Now, he has entirely given up on both party and Fish Head on grounds that were not only flippant but even he seemed unconvinced. In its place, Mahathir hoped, would be a new, stronger and better Malay party.

But, if the Malays aren’t already in Umno, they are in PAS or Amanah or PKR: Malay penchant for politics is extraordinary for the material and financial benefits to be derived thereof — it’s the Malay Struggle, you see. That being so, how, if not Umno, does Mahathir propose to fill his party. And if Umno then Mahathir appears to have forgotten his presumption that all of Umno is corrupted. This has to mean its rural rank and file as well, the people who gave cause to the party’s ideal — the Malay Struggle — and who are the same ones hoisting up the like of Najib, Ismail Sabri, Salleh Keruak and so on.

Yet, to Mahathir, Umno is no longer its former glorious self. Instead, it gets more absurd by the day.

What was the Umno ideal before Najib? Isn’t today’s Umno the party Mahathir had pined after all along: powerful, domineering, fascistic, lording over half the population all because he invented the notion that Malays own Malaysia, Umno by extension because it made the country. Under Umno a Malay can do anything, even theft and murder, and stealing mobile phones from Low Yat and money from the government. The poorer the Malay, the more entitlement there is, and this include entitlement to impunity from prosecution. And that, fundamentally, is what Umno is about. Isn’t it, Old Horse?

Now that Umno has everything, apa lagi Mahathir mahu? Reform? Clean government? But all that has nothing to do with the original Malay Struggle!

In Outsyed the Box, Part 2 How Singapore Handles Extremists: Ismail Menke, Zakir Naik, Imran Hossein Banned From Singapore, Syed Akbar Ali writes:

Not only was Zakir Naik the pro salafi psycho “given” three islands in Terengganu but he was also awarded the Ma’al Hijrah Award before. Why so? The reason is very simple : the locals are bodoh. Incredibly stupid.

This sort of one-liner trope, characteristic of Akbar Ali, is also characteristic of Umno justification for its fascism and tyranny; they simply make things up, all in a whim:

Exhibit A:

This is our struggle, we should press on without stopping. When do we stop? When the New Econnomic Policy (NEP) achieves 30 percent (equity for Malays). — Razlan Rafii

Exhibit B:

This is our country, if we want to talk about the struggle for Malays, then the special privileges should not be questioned and it should be granted to Malays indefinitely. — Razlan Rafii

Exhibit C:

In Malaysia, everybody knows that Malays are the masters of this land. We rule this country as provided for in the Federal Constitution. Anyone who touches upon Malay affairs or criticises Malays is [offending] our sensitivities. — Azimi Daim, former Umno Youth information chief

All of the above so dominated Malaysian political discourse for 50 years you’d heard them spoken of or written about — the exact, same words — verbatim by Mahathir, Kadir Jasin and others when, in their hey-days, they used to talk about how glorious was Umno. Today, they whistle another tune but, are the notes the same?

Is Razlan right: This is a Malay-only country, therefore Malaysia is a Malay struggle?

Is Syed Akbar right: Malays are stupid and therefore gave away three islands to an Indian ISIS preacher?

If Malays, as Akbar Ali says, are stupid, then there is something wrong with Razlan. To Akbar, Razlan is wrong only because he is stupid and nothing else. That is, being stupid changes nothing in the standpoint that Umno, being Malay, owns Malaysia and therefore it is entitled to do anything.

Which returns us to Mahathir: what is it that Najib has done today Umno wouldn’t do, now or before? Four billion ringgit? That’s not a Malay right? Najib’s justification for embezzlement had been provided by Mahathir before even 1MDB was created: Umno is Malay Ketuanan in highest form so that anything for Umno’s cause, whether it is to defeat anti-Muslim conspirators and Jews and Chinese, it is moral.

In circles, we return to the point in that argument above: Mahathir made the Umno that it is today but blames Najib. The Umno that he sees — Najib being its personification — is what he had laid out and had hoped for. Don’t like what you see, Old Horse? Umno has too much power? But isn’t this is what you have pined after for 30, 50 years?

But, here’s the root of the root, the bud of bud: The like of Mahathir, of Syed Akbar and Razlan aren’t wrong because they are all stupid. They are stupid because it pays to be wrong on Umno’s side: at the minimum, you’d get a Petronas job if you don’t get a free KFC dinner with some Umno bigshot.

  • Zakir Naik was given three islands because he has a Muslim Malay name; Ridhuan Tee, who’s no different from Zakir, gets only a professorship. Malaysia being Malay land, the Malays can give to whoever it wants. It pays to be Malay. What the fuck is it to you, Akbar? Don’t like to who Malays give land? Or, what Malays give? It is their country isn’t it? You go back to India.
  • Harussani Zakaria is allowed to say, kill the kafir harbi because, in those words, he goes after the same Red Shirt target, Chinese, that Umno struggles against.
  • Azimi doesn’t have to get confirmation from the Constitution — because it isn’t there, anywhere — that only Malays can rule Malaysia because it pays to be Malay; Umno has the whole country to give away. What’s four billion? Or sixty?

Najib can steal with impunity because he is Malay, Umno to boot. No one within Barisan dare to question him. Isn’t this what Mahathir wants all along for Umno, for a Malay to be unquestioned in his stupidity? And isn’t Najib a Malay?

To repeat: What is it that Najib has done that Umno — in the name of Malays — hadn’t done especially in Mahathir’s days? Remember May 13? Malaysia is a Malay struggle that entails Malays to even kill Chinese. This is, ultimately, the basis of Umno’s existence. You made Umno, helped by all your fucked-up media sycophants, Kadir et al. And now you want to kill it and replace it with what?

Get this right, Old Horse: Najib can only have as much power as Umno give him and Umno has too much power because Malays, starting with you, claim they are entitled to it.

Here is Kadir, taking a swipe at Najib:

JANGAN engkau bakar rumahmu

Kerana di dalamnya

Ada pijat, nyamuk dan kutu

Again, you got it wrong, stupid boy. It should be:

JANGAN engkau bakar rumahmu

Kerana di dalamnya

Ada Malaiyoo, Malaiyoo, Malaiyoo


‘Evidences’ on a Malay Unworthy of Respect



How to disrespect a Malaiyoo

Dyana Sofya Daud’s reply to Razlan Rafii just won’t do; it’s so limpid. What she has actually said is nothing more than some supercilious little diatribe. It goes only to show her apologetic servility. So stop it, stop trying to placate and stop trying to tell us why Razlan Rafii is wrong. Because, in doing so, you are merely telling him how a Malay like Razlan has been accorded respect.

But, does he deserve it?

All that Razlan has merely asserted is how — instead of saying, why — the DAP, Chinese by extension, had been been disrespectful of Malays, a Malay like him in particular. But, is this what he really wants: Proof of respect? Go back now to his list of evidences, Dyana. Isn’t it true that the underlying core of that little boy’s trite isn’t about asking for respect. No; it is this instead: Why a Malay like Razlan or, by the same token, any Umno Malaiyoo, should be deserving of respect?

To which the answer is easy and requires only a matter-of-fact statement: no motherfucking Malaiyoo such as Razlan can possibly deserve courtesy, not even an iota of it. His existence, his words, and his speeches are sufficient proof as to why not. Just like Najib is undeserving, and like Ismail Sabri and Jamal Yunos and so on, a Malaiyoo like Razlan is undeserving because he is, after all, nothing more than motherfucking Razlan. He deserves only pig-shit in his face.


The Homecoming of Fall



Truth in the Hoax

You got to say, after going through the things below, that guy at Saint Hoax is good.




Now to the wares…


Happily ever after?






Breakfast at Pizza Hut


The artist of these designs and wares is Anonymous. Only thing known: the person is Middle Eastern. More on Saint Hoax at (click on the sign):


On Twitter


When you give up on men and end up marrying your best friend

On Instagram




Leaders of the World Unite!

War Drags You Out: World Leaders Get Transformed in to Drag Queens

War Drags You Out: World Leaders Get Transformed in to Drag Queens

War Drags You Out: World Leaders Get Transformed in to Drag Queens

War Drags You Out: World Leaders Get Transformed in to Drag Queens

War Drags You Out: World Leaders Get Transformed in to Drag Queens

War Drags You Out: World Leaders Get Transformed in to Drag Queens

Things Fall Apart

Chinese thoughts on the Federation


Country of Multiple Nations

Mahathir Mohamad’s views concerning Johor and Sarawak have received elaboration — and dare we say, support — at a number of places (Jebat1, Jebat2, Kadir, Syed Akbar). In his defense, there is a throwback to the old ‘Bangsa Malaysia’ notion of a national ‘race’ or identity and which, in turn, is posited against regional sentiments. Mahathir’s primary concern is that regionality, driven far enough, would lead to, after Singapore, a further breakup of the Federation. This is neither reasoned argument nor fact; it is just a claim.

The Chinese have a stake in those claims. Not least is this, it is better to live in Johor or Sarawak than in Kelantan because there nobody could be free, not even when you go for a hair cut, and not even for the most pious imam.

There is a far more compelling reason to enter this fray: for the sake of a best possible outcome, federation or no federation.

Because ideas tend to be nebulous, difficult to nail down, hence different in feel from objective reality (a tree, a stone and so on), almost all critical terms employed in discussing about the federation have been highly abstract. Consequently, a few points of clarification are called for.

1. National identity. This seems to the pivot of the arguments. For the purpose of elucidation, Lee Kuan Yew is useful. He once described Singapore this way: it is a country united but not yet a single nation. Huh? What he means is this: Country is generic and a commonly used term; nation is political specific. Restated, a country is a composite of multiple ethnics but — and this is critical — already united under a single flag, single government, four official languages and so on. Nation is one country, one ethnicity, etc. This implies a united country is not necessary a united nation; nor does it say which is preferred.

Does a nation exists anywhere then? Those camel-Saudis come to mind. But it’s not even a nation in its definitive sense: It is a family-run dictatorial enterprise called the House of al-Saud; a sub-tribe group, 1975 native population 7 mn, 1985 doubled that; naturally, an impossibility even if every female including prepubescent girl gives birth to two children a year without stop — the poor female of an Arabian species. (The Saudis didn’t have a proper census until the 1970s and wasn’t really interested even after: their agong cum prime minister had been fixed even before birth.)

In the opposite of a single nation, Yugoslavia is another example. The breakup of Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and the USSR were essentially attempts to fit into the Westphalian (and the UN) notion of a single nation-state wherein a sovereign independent state power = nation, both contained within the physical, geography limits of a thing called country.

Yet, every country outside Europe — without exception — doesn’t fit that European model neatly. Malaysia’s problem is no different. China, even today, never sees itself as an ideological state, such as France or Britain wherein established laws (a Constitution being mostly widely used, as opposed to use of armed force or a family enterprise) make up the means of independent sovereignty. China’s history is too long for all that and so Chinese see themselves as a civilization state rather than as a nation-state. In China’s case, sovereignty rests on culture, predominantly Han. It already has a national identity before there was a nation called China which, over 3000-4000 years, keep changing in size and geography and ethnic makeup. Identity preceded, gobbled then birthed the ‘nation’.

In modern terms, though, nation first then comes national identity. Absent of that is a copycat version, such as Singapore, so that, invariably and as enunciated in LKY, there are multiple identities within a trumped-up nation. Since such a trumped-up nation is diverse, the problem that follows is called ‘unity’. But in what sense unity? Everyone goes under the same flag after all — and why is it preferred? Less conflict? But, here, the counterfactual reality: Scandinavia speaks the same language, only with minor variations. Yet it broke up into Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and they have since lived happily ever after. Ditto Czech Republic and Slovakia. Breaking up, it appears, becomes good, and single language is not a requisite of unity; further evidence of which is the Arab world. Therefore, has the ‘problem’ been imagined? Or, dare you say, manufactured?

2. Federation. Question: What is a federation? Fundamentally, it extents the idea of nation-state outwards, two or more nations or nation-states make a federation. It’s somewhat like, after independent Czech and Slovakia, comes Czechoslovakia. This creates a LKY problem: since Singapore is a country of multiple linguistic, ethnic nations, is it a federation? Of course it isn’t because one part is missing from the equation: ethnicity = nation = state. The state. Applied to Malaysia, the idea of federation gets far more problematic because, introduced into federation, are different histories, sultanate systems, tribal groups before that, and regionality, all jumbled up into just one thing — ethnicity. There are simply no clear-cut demarcations.

Take Malacca in its formative years. When Parameswara turned up at the Ming court of emperor Zhengde (rule, 1505-1521), so the off-archive stories say, the court scribes didn’t know how to place the man on record. If he is the sultan, what covers his domain and where? The sultan’s domain was a group of villages around a river mouth, and what’s name of the river, from which mountain does it flow out? No one at the time knew. All of which says, statehood hadn’t fully materialized and, hence, by extension a nation of Malacca which the Ming people finally gave it the name maliujia to bring into accord the earliest (Tang era) stated term, manlaja. The further back one goes, the more difficult it is pin down a nation and therefore the source of sovereign power.

Because the source of sovereign authority is critical to defining nation, and vice-versa, that, in its turn, matters to the creation of a federation or, under the current debate, in the opposite direction to un-federate. Which part or nation has greater say, or is it equal, and why. The Constitution is no help because it sets terms at only one point in time, at the moment of Malaysia’s birth, disregarding history in their entirety. In such a situation, arguments about federation and, related to it, unity, can regress to infinity reaching this: reductio ad absurdum. Meaning, reduction or argumentum to absurdity.

3. Bangsa Malaysia. Mahathir’s level of political understanding is one of his one thousand-and-one Achilles’ heels so that when he uses Bangsa as a means to create ‘unity’, he puts the cart before the horse. That is, it is a cart not even in existence. What exists though is a single country, one passport nationality, of multiple ethnics, origins, multiple nations and especially multiple federations. That is, Malaysia is a federation of federations, Federated Malay states, unfederated ones, Sabah, Sarawak. To drive such a cart — the so-called nation of Malaysia — Mahathir uses the horse named Bangsa. That was an entirely absurd set-up since race or ethnicity or a distinct group is the product of a nation and not the other way around.

Grouping all the peninsula states under the name Malaya has turned out to be a disaster. It permitted Umno far greater access to an even larger population, usurping sovereign power, beating all nine sultans combined. Expanding Umno to Sabah has further made the near impossibility of removing Najib right away. And then, decades later, there’s still no Bangsa in sight. Mahathir failed because the idea was never meant to succeed; it couldn’t; it became instead a convenient political tool — all the yada, yada about why Umno unites the Federation.

In trying to create Bangsa Malaysia, Mahathir was wrong in his assumption that there is even a Bangsa Melayu at the core around which everyone else rallies. He was wrong that the Malays or the bumis of Sarawak or Sabah want the same things as him, a mamak Malay after all. One final repudiation of Mahathir comes from Shafie Apdal, a Sabah Malay, when he refused to join Bersatu although both men are on the same side against Najib. Neither Mahathir nor Muhyiddin Yassin seem able to penetrate into that man Shafie: He must have seen how, from the lens of history, Bangsa Melayu, via Umno, created more divisiveness than to unite. Among the reasons is their differing sense of morality. Other reasons, practical ones relate to the spoils of plunder within an enlarged Umno. The net effect from the change in party demographics means there is less to be shared among more people with the result that the thieving today has to go into billions upon billions. Why is Mahathir is surprised by the scale of the 1MDB theft? He knew Umno had money politics in his days. Expand the party, expand the membership, expand their domains, you invariably have to expand patronage; money simply has to keep in step. Following which comes the question that dogs Federal-Sarawak relations: who gets more? No wonder, the Kadazandusuns have come to resent Umno so much. In the circumstances, who should Shafie serve? Sabah people or Putrajaya, with or without Umno? This is same position as the Johor sultanate who especially can’t be bribed because they don’t need Umno’s money and especially don’t want it. He was right about Mahathir.

Malaysia left as it were when we found it, might not have been so bad in hindsight, an excellent piece of rojak found no where else. Abstract concepts such as Bangsa are therefore best left to academic papers; the rest of us just want to get on with our lives, better still if we have 2.6 bn ringgit returned into our pockets.

The only thing today that unites Malaysia is the Law, that is, the Constitution, backed up by the Royal Malay Regiment; all else is just political claptrap. That is, Malaysia is not an ideological state, much less a civilizational state; it doesn’t belong to thugs nor thieves, it isn’t ruled by some idiot tribal family claiming to be descendants of some prophet. It is an artifice, like paper printed with dollar signs: what is legal is what can be imposed by force and by a man named Khalid Abu Bakar and behind him Najib Razak.


The Problem of the South and East

Now that we have got the abstractions, along with Najib, out of the way, what’s the problem? Let’s deal with Sarawak and Johor simultaneously because, their grouses although seemingly different, allow for comparison but converging into just one conclusion….

Geography. Nearly all other countries are physically and geographically contiguous, a natural outcome in the birth of a country. (The last country split by distance went to war, among themselves, creating Bangladesh and Pakistan.) Not Malaysia. It is an absurdity in so many ways, and not just because it is separated by an ocean. Sarawak, supposedly an equal partner with the Peninsula, is bigger physically yet has only a small say and if it must beg do so softly. Johor isn’t Sarawak; not their histories, nor geography and especially not in their relationship with the Center, Putrajaya. On practical terms, then, the Center owes Sarawak more than it owes Johor; one is a signatory in the Federation, the other not. At Federal there is representation, but that’s only appearance because Umno is the master.

Resource sharing. Johor has no problem with this. Of course not; it has no oil, therefore, no money to share. This is, instead, Sarawak’s chief complaint and resource includes human resource, such as, how many Sarawakians are employed by Petronas. This gets into the headline because employment, people going in and out, is something that Sarawak has control. Trees and monkeys, jungle and mountains, Sarawak also has control but, out at sea, resource is federal jurisdiction and Federal is not three States together; it is not even Peninsula but Umno. Where ever oil exists, a Petronas project ought to be, on fair basis, and at the minimum, a 50:50 partnership. Instead, Umno sapu everything. (Taib Mahmud got money from trees and land, so didn’t care. 1MDB’s ability to borrow money at the blink of an eye was dependent directly on ability to repay, hence on Federal reputation and asset backing and that, in turn, dependent on Petronas. Fact: 1MDB’s USD6.5 bn raised was benchmark to Petronas.)

Getting a pittance is one thing, but to watch the money taken elsewhere and not put into the parts needed and useful is another. In 2009, 1MDB declared energy investment half a world away. Caspian Sea? Where is it? Whereas right in the front door is Sarawak and Najib never even gave it a thought, a people who, on point of politics, are his kin. (Mahathir is not much better though that came out of incompetency and faulty logic, not immorality.) In the circumstances, what would you therefore do if you were named Adenan? Answer: kick Petronas. The Sarawak-only employment is, in consequence, a manifestation of a dissatisfaction rather than the cause of any dispute. It also goes to show, along with other signs, that Najib has reneged on a deal with Adenan during the Sarawak elections. The latter now says, I helped you but you are not helping me. In Umno culture this is, biasa la: Najib is legendary in notoriety for breaking promises. Ask Hindraf. Or, look at 1MDB today and its promises in 2009.

Underlying those problems is, distribution of power.

Power Sharing. Johor’s power-sharing with Putrajaya precedes the Federal Constitution, going further back into past. That is Johor’s starting point, something quite unlike Sarawak where balance of power and sharing thereof is laid out under Constitutional rules. That being so, there is little to add. If power distribution between Sarawak/Sabah and Putrajaya is disproportionate and unequal, then, instead of blaming the Constitution it is incumbent on the Putrajaya to act in the spirit of the Federation not by Law. The onus is, thus, on Najib, Umno by extension, and not Barisan because within it Sarawak’s voice is no louder than a squid. Again, there has been equality gone kaput. If, therefore, the Federation cannot rely wholly on the Constitution it must also look at Najib’s motives, performance and results. And what’s the score in all areas? Zero!

Identity. Putrajaya is central because, under Najib especially, he perpetuated the fiction that Sarawak/Sabah is subsumed to the federal government. Federal has always meant Melayu.

But, what is the Melayu? This is so open-ended that when it gets more Arabic, more tribal, and more desert like nobody notices, much less acknowledge. Its culture becomes exclusionary, more distant and more antagonistic than what many Malays have tried, not all successfully, to portray all along as tolerant and all-embracing. Enter PAS. Enter Najib, and behind him Saudi Arabia, PAS and Jakim ustaz and imams. ISIS follows. The result seen today would be something unrecognizable at Malaysia’s birth and before that.

Identity, thus, and not just resource sharing, is Johor’s primary grouse with Putrajaya. It explains why the Johor royal house keeps talking about the past, invoking it even: your bangsa has become not our bangsa. This distinction rules out the dispute as one between Bangsa Malaysia and Bangsa Johor since the latter is but a cross-sectional slice of the former. The point of dispute must lay elsewhere, therefore, since regional loyalty can only has as much reality as national loyalty where, even there, it is questionable and never clear cut; Malaysia being what it is. But, hacked through these abstractions, one finds lying there in the thicket, matters that concerns morality, notions that encompass ideas of what’s just, fair, plural, tolerant, fortitude, righteousness and the much maligned word, dignity. One bangsa is simply no longer the bangsa the other knows since the culture enveloping it has long been corrupted and corroded.

Federal failure isn’t, therefore, just the failure to preserve the bangsa, agama dan negara idea — that is the cultural or ethnic elements of the actual Malay but also, and worse for it, its contribution in stripping away the bangsa-self. That is, the sense of loss in the easy-going and undogmatic person; one that’s more human than God.

Sarawak, too, shares the same grouse only to a lesser extent because Putrajaya is an ocean away and they have some powers, immigration for example, that can put a check on the Salafist proselytizing. But because identity has become so political, again beginning with Mahathir, it is all that Adenan can do is play along while inside he could just as well be seething with anger. Not coincidentally, Sarawak is the first to openly reject the hudud of PAS and the first to openly and defiantly permit English into its state and legislative proceedings.

Government. It underlies all the complaints: administrative, financial, resource use and distribution, power sharing, religion, sensitivities, morality. If the Federal government had upheld, even just half the things it professes to do then the present situation wouldn’t have degenerate to the degree it has. The failure of government has been momentous, piling up crisis on crisis. It is so stupid, so inept, and so disastrous that government failure is the byword in the lips of every man, woman and child, even among Umno members who preferred simply to shrug their shoulders and say, biasa la.

Umno alone, Najib by extension, has been acting the ultimate jurisdiction and sole authority in defining nationalism, identity and bangsa, including even its morals (recall, they say 1MDB is not theft). This has been emblematic in some of the greatest failures of the Federation and since Umno has sequestered all its powers it alone must bear full responsibility.


Chinese. As an aside, the Chinese have no collective position on the sentiments of Johor and Sarawak: Is there a difference? Any where we go, we’re still pendatangs. Sarawak is ahead of Johor in regards to the Chinese; no madman ustaz to worry and Najib is on the other shore of the ocean.

Other notes. For too long, Mahathir et al have been promoting the fiction that Malays are super-tolerant whereas other people act the bully. He has been lucky to have compliant people to rule, people who have been tolerant. Now, along comes a super-thief Najib, then tangkap here, tangkap there, and tangkap everywhere. On his heels comes ISIS and 1MDB, and those are just desserts. If Johor and Sarawak comes out spitting, it is not by coincidence of timing. They prove the point that if you keep pushing and pushing, people will push back: the weapons of the weak.

But not us, the Chinese, Bro! We are just pendatang. If pendatang, we keep our mouths shut and so can you, Tun, like the Johor Sultan has so properly advised.

Take a break 老马. Only tell us with your mouth what you mean in your heart and understand, please, where you have been wrong because that’s the truth. Do that, and not only us, the Chinese, but Johor and Sarawak would be happy to join you to break that piece of Bugis pirate. We have to reset everything. Everything. First, though, you have to know where to begin. This whole business is not purely about Najib; he is nothing. Think about it a moment; he is nothing really. The bigger challenge is Malaysia and that starts in the heart, and no heart proves its intent waving flags on Merdeka day. Even thieves willingly do it.

(Pssst. Did you hear, Jebat. Don’t tell anyone: Petra Kamarudin has threatened to kill Chinese, another May 13, if we join the Pro-Tun ANC ‘conspiracy’. Don’t laugh, OK? But, from where you sit, can you hear the sound of those terrified Chinese knees knocking against each other? Send me a quick note if you do. And we’ll order those Knees to shut up; we’re giving ourselves away!)


Oh, not the evening…

The soul sits alone and waits for a footstep that never comes. — Edith Wharton





An Imported Medieval Past: Malay & Yet Un-Malay


Typically portrayed by the Salafist Arab Saudis and their fellow travellers, ISIS, and especially by the Malay ulama and ustaz, the medieval history of Islam is an unadulterated, pure, pristine and sinless world. If only the Malays return to that past, then life would be proper, fruitful and in accordance with the Islamic principles. Rubbish. Such a world is a PAS-Hadi Awang invention. Here is a book (cover pictured above) to prove it, but then the Arab world is right next door to the decadent West.

Titled The Ultimate Ambition in the Arts of Erudition, its writing started in 1314 by a retired Egyptian bureaucrat named Shihab al-Din al-Nuwayri. It covers 9,000 pages in thirty volumes, an attempt to fit all of human history from Adam onward, all known plants and animals, geography, law, the arts of government and war, poetry, recipes, jokes, and of course, the revelations of Islam.

In one sample chapter:

That sly and brilliant one
Who grows girlish in his impudence
He appears manly at first
But after a drink is suddenly a woman
When you tell him: “Baby, say Moses,”
He lisps moistly: “Motheth”

That was about homosexuality: manly at first / suddenly a woman. ‘The juxtaposition is one of many in this bizarre, fascinating book that illustrate the sprawlingly heterodox reality of the early centuries of Islam, so different from the crude puritanical myths purveyed by modern-day jihadis,’ said the New York Review of Books in which the passage was cited. NYRB has reported that English translations of Erudition have begun to be published.

That passage wasn’t the only thing of course, reports NYRB. Another passage contains, ‘many formulae for enlarging the penis, tightening the vagina, enemas, suppositories, contraceptives, and other sexual aids, with titles like “A Recipe for Another Medicine that Produces Indescribable Pleasure.


Reading it is like stumbling into a cavernous attic full of unimaginably strange artifacts, some of them unforgettable, some merely dross. From the alleged self-fellation of monkeys to the many lovely Bedouin words for the night sky (“the Encrusted, because of its abundance of stars, and the Forehead, because of its smoothness”) to the court rituals of Egypt’s then-overlords, the Mamluks, nothing seems to escape Nuwayri’s taxonomic ambitions.

Nuwayri draws heavily on earlier Islamic sources, and his respect for tradition usually prevents him from passing judgment, even when the claims he is citing are hilariously implausible. In one section, for instance, he passes on a story about a sexually voracious she-bear who captures a man so that she can slake her lust on him again and again, licking his feet raw to prevent him from leaving the cave. Yet at a few points Nuwayri permits himself a brief editorial comment, as in one section about happiness: “Imru’ al-Qays was asked, ‘What is happiness?’ and he replied: ‘A delicate maiden burning with fragrance, burdened by her ample curves.’ He was infatuated by women.” At another point Nuwayri relays a story from “a trustworthy person among the Abyssinians” about how to escape the charge of a wild rhino: “If the man urinates on the rhinoceros’s ear, it will run away and not return to him. That way, the man will escape from it. God knows best.” One has to wonder if the pious addendum is slightly tongue-in-cheek—a rhetorical shrug of the shoulders.

At times Nuwayri allows his sources to compete with each other, citing different juristic opinions on wine-drinking, music, and the punishments for illicit sex. At least once, he even dramatizes such a disagreement:

The caliph al-Ma’mūn asked (the judge) Yaḥyā ibn Aktham about the meaning of desire, and he replied: “It is the auspicious thoughts that a man’s heart falls in love with and his soul esteems.” Then (the theologian) Thumāma spoke up and said: “Shut up, Yaḥyā! You should stick to answering questions about divorce or whether a pilgrim violates his ritual purity by hunting a gazelle or killing an ant.”

Mostly, the heterodoxy creeps in sideways, in the book’s unapologetic references to supposedly illicit pleasures. The section on the human body includes the sub-heading “On Poetic Descriptions of the Down on the Young Male Cheek.” The section titled “On the Buttocks” includes this poetic snippet:

The eyes of his onlookers gathered around
His haunches, like a second belt  

But Nuwayri is not deliberately sabotaging Muslim orthodoxy. He is merely reflecting a world in which moral prescriptions existed alongside a much messier reality, and some degree of dissonance between the two was accepted and forgiven.